Talk:Boys/@comment-34890635-20200114222813/@comment-25032269-20200115130959
@AnimationStuff11 see, your comment is bothering me on many levels. 1) «I'm kinda surprised they didn't even bother to censor "Gay"» This doesn't sound the same as "Why didn't they censor gay?" at all. That "didn't even bother to" assumes that the word Gay needs to be censored by default in any PG context, which is nonsense and surely not an expression of curiosity or ingenuity. 2) Homophobia doesn't only equal to/isn't only expressed by a direct attack, whether it be verbal or physical, to one or more members of the LGBT+ community for the sole reason of being a part of it (which, mind you, doesn't excuse any bad individual behaviour, but that's not what we're discussing about); any act, ideology or expression that considers - even implicitly - that a LGBT+ individual shouldn't be treated as any other person, shouldn't have the same rights as them, and in general should be considered as "something less", "something that is not normal" or even "something dangerous" can be defined as homophobic. In this case, this person thinking that "gay" is a word that should be censored by default in the context of a E-10+/PEGI 3 game assumes that the word itself is not safe for kids, which implicitly means that the concept of being gay is something that a child shouldn't be exposed to, because it's a "risk" of making them learn about something they shouldn't until they reach maturity - as if the word "gay" by itself was inevitably connected to sex or other acts/words/ideas that are not safe for children. 3) While ignorance and lack of sensitivity is mostly fault of the society and context in which a person lives, this doesn't excuse any of their behaviours that target a group of people for no reason other than who they are (assuming that we're not talking about people with antisocial behaviours, which, once again, is an individual matter and don't belong in this reasoning); the concepts of "freedom of speech" and "freedom of expression", as defined by law, mean that anyone is free to express and voice their opinions about something, but when made in a civil manner, in the respect of others and without negating or belittling the life of other people. Therefore, acts of homophobia/transphobia/racism/etc. can't be justified as belonging to general freedom of speech/expression, but are instead an expression of individual freedom, which as the saying goes "ends when mine begins" and as such deserve to be reprimanded (and, possibly, shut down) because they express the will of pushing forward the beliefs of a restricted number of individuals by reducing other people's freedom. 4) «they only asked as this game is FAMILY oriented and for ALL AGES» Again, the concept of "being gay" is not tied by itself to topics that aren't family-friendly, so this connection shouldn't have even been made in the first place. I get the fact that in the LGBT+ community it's a common practice to exaggerate reactions to any type of ignorant or semi-ignorant comment to the point of bullying, but on the other way let's not act like everyone behind a keyboard is emotionally incapable of being accounted for what they said and think. You can't always educate other people by being nice, holding their hands and treating them like a curious child (unless they really are children, but from what I've seen most of the times they are paradoxically way more tolerant and naive about these topics, and in any other case it's the parents' fault to let them roam free in the net without properly educating them first). Sorry for the essay, but I wanted to drive a point that is dear to me once and for all, even if this isn't necessarily the right context or place to do so. EDIT: formatting